Do Super-hydrophilic Surfaces Affect Implant Primary Stability in the Early Healing Phase of Osseointegration? A Systematic Review with Metanalysis.

Purpose Implant stability, related to mechanical (primary) and biological (secondary) bone-to-implant interactions, is essential for osseointegration. Implant surface bioactivation is a process designed to accelerate and enhance surface-cell interaction.The purpose of this systematic review was to determine whether a beneficial effect of bioactive (BS) over traditional surfaces (TS) can be identified.Materials And Methods An electronic search of Pubmed, Scopus, and CENTRAL databases was performed to identify randomized (RCT) and non-randomized controlled trials comparing BS and TS implants. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration tool for RCTs and the Joanna Briggs Institute tool for non-RCTs. Outcome variables were implant stability quotient (ISQ) measured through resonance frequency analysis from placement to prosthetic loading, one-year implant survival rate, and marginal bone loss (MBL). Meta-analysis was performed where possible.Results Of the 6920 records identified, 13 RCTs and two non-RCTs were included, reporting on 1256 implants (49.8% TS and 50.2% BS) in 596 patients. Four of the studies had a low risk of bias, three had a moderate risk and eight had a high risk. The meta-analysis showed no evidence of an effect of implant surface on survival rate (p = 0.99, 10 studies) and MBL (p = 0.86, 5 studies). At baseline (10 studies) and at one month (9 studies) the ISQ did not differ statistically significantly different between groups. A statistically significantly greater increase in ISQ was found for the BS implants compared to the TS implants (p = 0.04) at three months after placement (9 studies).Conclusion An advantage of BS over TS during the early osseointegration phase could not be demonstrated, but a positive effect on implant stability seems to occur after three months of placement. The statement that bioactive surfaces may safely allow early and immediate implant loading is insufficiently supported by the current evidence.

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Open Access CRIS of the University of Bern
Published
2025-08-25
DOI
https://doi.org/10.48620/91126
Primary Topic
Geochemistry and Geologic Mapping
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Do Super-hydrophilic Surfaces Affect Implant Primary Stability in the Early Healing Phase of Osseointegration? A Systematic Review with Metanalysis.

Open Access CRIS of the University of Bern
Geochemistry and Geologic Mapping
article

Do Super-hydrophilic Surfaces Affect Implant Primary Stability in the Early Healing Phase of Osseointegration? A Systematic Review with Metanalysis.

article en

Abstract

Purpose Implant stability, related to mechanical (primary) and biological (secondary) bone-to-implant interactions, is essential for osseointegration. Implant surface bioactivation is a process designed to accelerate and enhance surface-cell interaction.The purpose of this systematic review was to determine whether a beneficial effect of bioactive (BS) over traditional surfaces (TS) can be identified.Materials And Methods An electronic search of Pubmed, Scopus, and CENTRAL databases was performed to identify randomized (RCT) and non-randomized controlled trials comparing BS and TS implants. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration tool for RCTs and the Joanna Briggs Institute tool for non-RCTs. Outcome variables were implant stability quotient (ISQ) measured through resonance frequency analysis from placement to prosthetic loading, one-year implant survival rate, and marginal bone loss (MBL). Meta-analysis was performed where possible.Results Of the 6920 records identified, 13 RCTs and two non-RCTs were included, reporting on 1256 implants (49.8% TS and 50.2% BS) in 596 patients. Four of the studies had a low risk of bias, three had a moderate risk and eight had a high risk. The meta-analysis showed no evidence of an effect of implant surface on survival rate (p = 0.99, 10 studies) and MBL (p = 0.86, 5 studies). At baseline (10 studies) and at one month (9 studies) the ISQ did not differ statistically significantly different between groups. A statistically significantly greater increase in ISQ was found for the BS implants compared to the TS implants (p = 0.04) at three months after placement (9 studies).Conclusion An advantage of BS over TS during the early osseointegration phase could not be demonstrated, but a positive effect on implant stability seems to occur after three months of placement. The statement that bioactive surfaces may safely allow early and immediate implant loading is insufficiently supported by the current evidence.

Open Access CRIS of the University of Bern
University of Dental Medicine (MM)
Openalex Percentile: Top 53%
Geochemistry and Geologic Mapping
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.